 | | | 
23.09.2020, 19:22
| | Re: Rip rgb | Quote: | |  | | | Of course not. Just regurgitating dangerous, outlandish claims. | | | | | There are far more dangerous claims than this.
| 
23.09.2020, 19:40
|  | Forum Legend | | Join Date: Nov 2009 Location: Zurich-ish
Posts: 5,230
Groaned at 294 Times in 210 Posts
Thanked 11,133 Times in 4,186 Posts
| | Re: Rip rgb | Quote: | |  | | | It's called a double standard. Democrats should know all about them. | | | | | Yes, a double-standard on the Republicans' part. There is a difference between a Supreme Court Justice dying and being replaced 9 months prior to an election and one being replaced just six weeks prior.
Above all else, what I see happening is that it's become more and more obvious that more clearly defined rules or laws need to be put in place regarding when a president can or cannot appoint a new Justice, prior to an election. What I think is also apparent is that the entire system of appointing Justices needs to be re-examined and 'upgraded' in order to try to secure a more balanced Supreme Court.
| The following 4 users would like to thank Pancakes for this useful post: | | 
23.09.2020, 20:52
|  | Forum Veteran | | Join Date: Sep 2008 Location: Horw (LU)
Posts: 515
Groaned at 77 Times in 52 Posts
Thanked 418 Times in 219 Posts
| | Re: Rip rgb | Quote: | |  | | | It's called a double standard. Democrats should know all about them. | | | | | I guess that makes it ok then. Nice job normalizing hypocrisy.
| 
23.09.2020, 20:54
|  | Forum Veteran | | Join Date: Sep 2008 Location: Horw (LU)
Posts: 515
Groaned at 77 Times in 52 Posts
Thanked 418 Times in 219 Posts
| | Re: Rip rgb | Quote: | |  | | | There are far more dangerous claims than this. | | | | | Ahhh, as long as there are more dangerous ones, yours is ok. I’m really getting the hang of this.
| 
23.09.2020, 20:55
| Forum Legend | | Join Date: Jul 2020 Location: Frick, Aargau
Posts: 2,876
Groaned at 62 Times in 50 Posts
Thanked 4,070 Times in 1,901 Posts
| | Re: Rip rgb | Quote: | |  | | | Yes, a double-standard on the Republicans' part. There is a difference between a Supreme Court Justice dying and being replaced 9 months prior to an election and one being replaced just six weeks prior.
Above all else, what I see happening is that it's become more and more obvious that more clearly defined rules or laws need to be put in place regarding when a president can or cannot appoint a new Justice, prior to an election. What I think is also apparent is that the entire system of appointing Justices needs to be re-examined and 'upgraded' in order to try to secure a more balanced Supreme Court. | | | | | Sorry that's just an entirely partisan view which overlooks the clear constitutional position which makes clear that the republicans had the mandate both to block the Obama judge and to appoint their own judge.
There ARE clearly defined rules you just don't like them.
| The following 5 users would like to thank HickvonFrick for this useful post: | | This user groans at HickvonFrick for this post: | | 
23.09.2020, 21:53
|  | Forum Veteran | | Join Date: Sep 2008 Location: Horw (LU)
Posts: 515
Groaned at 77 Times in 52 Posts
Thanked 418 Times in 219 Posts
| | Re: Rip rgb | Quote: | |  | | | Sorry that's just an entirely partisan view which overlooks the clear constitutional position which makes clear that the republicans had the mandate both to block the Obama judge and to appoint their own judge.
There ARE clearly defined rules you just don't like them. | | | | | Horse dung. Their excuse for blocking Obama's pick had nothing to do with any imaginary "mandate" in 2016, it was based on McConnell pulling out some dusty old rule so he could continue his vow to obstruct everything Obama tried to do.
Likewise, Trump's 46% of the vote is hardly a mandate.
And neither of those could ever constitute "clearly defined rules".
| The following 3 users would like to thank robogobo for this useful post: | | The following 4 users groan at robogobo for this post: | | 
23.09.2020, 21:58
| Forum Legend | | Join Date: Jul 2020 Location: Frick, Aargau
Posts: 2,876
Groaned at 62 Times in 50 Posts
Thanked 4,070 Times in 1,901 Posts
| | Re: Rip rgb | Quote: | |  | | | Horse dung. Their excuse for blocking Obama's pick had nothing to do with any imaginary "mandate" in 2016, it was based on McConnell pulling out some dusty old rule so he could continue his vow to obstruct everything Obama tried to do.
Likewise, Trump's 46% of the vote is hardly a mandate.
And neither of those could ever constitute "clearly defined rules". | | | | | It's nothing to do with what the Republicans have said - which I totally agree is all over the place. It's to do with what the constitution says. Article II, Section II of the Constitution.
Last edited by HickvonFrick; 23.09.2020 at 22:08.
| The following 2 users would like to thank HickvonFrick for this useful post: | | 
23.09.2020, 22:00
|  | Forum Veteran | | Join Date: Sep 2008 Location: Horw (LU)
Posts: 515
Groaned at 77 Times in 52 Posts
Thanked 418 Times in 219 Posts
| | Re: Rip rgb | Quote: | |  | | | It's nothing to do with what the Republicans have said - which I totally agree is all over the place. It's to do with what the constitution says. And yes Trump does have a mandate. Again from the constitution. | | | | | If Trump has a mandate simply because he's the current president, despite having lost the popular vote, then Obama had the mandate in 2016, having handily won both the EC and popular vote. Either way the hypocrisy is maddening and your previous post was full of problems.
| The following 2 users groan at robogobo for this post: | | 
23.09.2020, 22:07
| Forum Legend | | Join Date: Jul 2020 Location: Frick, Aargau
Posts: 2,876
Groaned at 62 Times in 50 Posts
Thanked 4,070 Times in 1,901 Posts
| | Re: Rip rgb | Quote: | |  | | | If Trump has a mandate simply because he's the current president, despite having lost the popular vote, then Obama had the mandate in 2016, having handily won both the EC and popular vote. Either way the hypocrisy is maddening and your previous post was full of problems. | | | | | No.... the mandate lies with the senate. Which the republicans held in 2016 and now in 2020. Article 2, Section 2 of the Constitution. If the democrats want their way they are going to have to win the senate at some stage.
(When I said Trump has a mandate I meant in general terms - the election of the Sc Justice rests with the senate).
I would vote Biden in this election, so don't shoot the messenger!
| This user would like to thank HickvonFrick for this useful post: | | This user groans at HickvonFrick for this post: | | 
23.09.2020, 22:16
| | Re: Rip rgb
Or can we all try to live up to the standards of RBG and Scalia perhaps? Argue your point but not take it personally and respect that others may in fact, have a point?
You may not agree with their perspective and that's fine. But let's not make it personal if possible | The following 4 users would like to thank for this useful post: | | 
23.09.2020, 22:29
|  | Forum Veteran | | Join Date: Feb 2020 Location: Kt Zurich
Posts: 1,179
Groaned at 36 Times in 28 Posts
Thanked 3,630 Times in 1,270 Posts
| | Re: Rip rgb | Quote: | |  | | | No.... the mandate lies with the senate. Which the republicans held in 2016 and now in 2020. Article 2, Section 2 of the Constitution. If the democrats want their way they are going to have to win the senate at some stage.
(When I said Trump has a mandate I meant in general terms - the election of the Sc Justice rests with the senate).
I would vote Biden in this election, so don't shoot the messenger! | | | | | I wrote this in another thread:
So what’s in the constitution is that the senate judiciary evaluates the president’s candidate, and the senate approves (or not) the candidate. The constitution says nothing about timing, so it is at the whim of the senate majority leader and the judiciary committee.
Seems like they could set some criteria on timing. Otherwise it gives the parties too much power. I think waiting 9 months is too long, and the argument “let the people decide” is disingenuous.
| 
23.09.2020, 22:31
|  | Forum Legend | | Join Date: Dec 2010 Location: Lugano
Posts: 32,716
Groaned at 2,626 Times in 1,868 Posts
Thanked 39,825 Times in 18,784 Posts
| | Re: Rip rgb | Quote: | |  | | | Yes, but it's been a long-held tradition in the US that a new Justice is not appointed until after a presidential election, when the Justice that is being replaced had passed away very close to the election. | | | | | Election is in November, even should Trump lose he still has 2 1/2 months to go after!
Tom
| The following 2 users would like to thank st2lemans for this useful post: | | The following 2 users groan at st2lemans for this post: | | 
23.09.2020, 22:33
|  | Forum Veteran | | Join Date: Sep 2008 Location: Horw (LU)
Posts: 515
Groaned at 77 Times in 52 Posts
Thanked 418 Times in 219 Posts
| | Re: Rip rgb | Quote: | |  | | | No.... the mandate lies with the senate. Which the republicans held in 2016 and now in 2020. Article 2, Section 2 of the Constitution. If the democrats want their way they are going to have to win the senate at some stage.
(When I said Trump has a mandate I meant in general terms - the election of the Sc Justice rests with the senate).
I would vote Biden in this election, so don't shoot the messenger! | | | | | So the mandate lies here in one case, and there in the other case, but in 2016 the other mandate was more mandate-y than this mandate, because in the end anybody can do whatever they want as long as they cheat, double-talk, move the goal posts and deny what they said four years prior, which actually has nothing to do with a mandate. And then we can take that and say boo-hoo the rules are clear and you just don't like them.
F me.
| This user would like to thank robogobo for this useful post: | | This user groans at robogobo for this post: | | 
23.09.2020, 22:33
|  | Forum Veteran | | Join Date: Sep 2008 Location: Horw (LU)
Posts: 515
Groaned at 77 Times in 52 Posts
Thanked 418 Times in 219 Posts
| | Re: Rip rgb | Quote: | |  | | | Election is in November, even should Trump lose he still has 2 1/2 months to go after!
Tom | | | | | You're repeating yourself.
| This user would like to thank robogobo for this useful post: | | This user groans at robogobo for this post: | | 
23.09.2020, 22:37
|  | Forum Veteran | | Join Date: Feb 2020 Location: Kt Zurich
Posts: 1,179
Groaned at 36 Times in 28 Posts
Thanked 3,630 Times in 1,270 Posts
| | Re: Rip rgb | Quote: | |  | | | Election is in November, even should Trump lose he still has 2 1/2 months to go after!
Tom | | | | | If he looses, he might be too busy.
| This user would like to thank ennui for this useful post: | | 
23.09.2020, 22:37
| Forum Legend | | Join Date: Jul 2020 Location: Frick, Aargau
Posts: 2,876
Groaned at 62 Times in 50 Posts
Thanked 4,070 Times in 1,901 Posts
| | Re: Rip rgb | Quote: | |  | | | So the mandate lies here in one case, and there in the other case, but in 2016 the other mandate was more mandate-y than this mandate, because in the end anybody can do whatever they want as long as they cheat, double-talk, move the goal posts and deny what they said four years prior, which actually has nothing to do with a mandate. And then we can take that and say boo-hoo the rules are clear and you just don't like them.
F me. | | | | | It's your country's constitution not mine! I agree the republican senators are duplicitous!
| 
23.09.2020, 22:38
|  | Forum Veteran | | Join Date: Feb 2020 Location: Kt Zurich
Posts: 1,179
Groaned at 36 Times in 28 Posts
Thanked 3,630 Times in 1,270 Posts
| | Re: Rip rgb | Quote: | |  | | | So the mandate lies here in one case, and there in the other case, but in 2016 the other mandate was more mandate-y than this mandate, because in the end anybody can do whatever they want as long as they cheat, double-talk, move the goal posts and deny what they said four years prior, which actually has nothing to do with a mandate. And then we can take that and say boo-hoo the rules are clear and you just don't like them.
F me. | | | | | Exactly. But the rules are not clear and perhaps should be clarified.
| The following 2 users would like to thank ennui for this useful post: | | 
23.09.2020, 22:41
|  | Forum Veteran | | Join Date: Sep 2008 Location: Horw (LU)
Posts: 515
Groaned at 77 Times in 52 Posts
Thanked 418 Times in 219 Posts
| | Re: Rip rgb | Quote: | |  | | | It's your country's constitution not mine! I agree the republican senators are duplicitous! | | | | | Great, so stop using my country's constitution, of which you have a limited understanding – especially when it comes to what's a mandate and what's not a mandate – to taunt other users. | Quote: | |  | | | Sorry that's just an entirely partisan view which overlooks the clear constitutional position which makes clear that the republicans had the mandate both to block the Obama judge and to appoint their own judge.
There ARE clearly defined rules you just don't like them. | | | | | It's more than a little incendiary.
| The following 2 users groan at robogobo for this post: | | 
23.09.2020, 22:53
|  | Forum Veteran | | Join Date: Feb 2020 Location: Kt Zurich
Posts: 1,179
Groaned at 36 Times in 28 Posts
Thanked 3,630 Times in 1,270 Posts
| | Re: Rip rgb
Read Frank Bruni‘s opinion in The NY Times. I found it interesting. One of his points is that a majority is not necessarily a mandate. https://www.mcall.com/featured/sns-n...27i-story.html | The following 2 users would like to thank ennui for this useful post: | | 
23.09.2020, 22:59
|  | Forum Legend | | Join Date: Dec 2010 Location: Lugano
Posts: 32,716
Groaned at 2,626 Times in 1,868 Posts
Thanked 39,825 Times in 18,784 Posts
| | Re: Rip rgb | Quote: | |  | | | You're repeating yourself. | | | | | Some people need reminding.
Tom
| The following 2 users would like to thank st2lemans for this useful post: | | This user groans at st2lemans for this post: | |
Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests) | | Thread Tools | | Display Modes | Linear Mode |
Posting Rules
| You may not post new threads You may not post replies You may not post attachments You may not edit your posts HTML code is Off | | | All times are GMT +2. The time now is 08:18. | |